¿Por qué Rusia defiende la legalidad internacional?

Pregunta importante como ya dije aquí en relación a Putin y su carta a los americanos:

In answer to the United States and France’s openly stated intention of bombing Syria, Russian officials have constantly repeated the importance of not violating Chapter VII of the UN Charter, concerning acts of aggression. President Putin also mentioned this point inhis New York Times article:: “Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.”

None of this should come as a surprise, since this was also Russia’s position with regard to the illegal bombing of Serbia by NATO in 1999, as well as the illegal invasion of Iraq by a coalition led by the US and the UK in 2003.

It seems clear, therefore, that upholding international law is a fundamental principle of Russian foreign policy. Such an unwavering and principled position would be admirable for a nation-state, were it not for the fact that Russia adopts this position not because of a high moral standard but out of necessity. There are two reasons for this.

On the one hand, Russia is one of only a handful of nations in the world to have a truly independent foreign policy. Apart from the United States, only China, India, Iran and Russia (and perhaps one or two others) are impervious to foreign pressure when acting on the international stage. This is certainly not the case of Western nations, as their timid and muted reactions even to the most egregious behaviour by the United States make clear (the Assange and the Snowden affairs are good recent indications of their subservience to Uncle Sam).

On the other hand, Russia cannot disregard international law; only the United States can do that. Russia therefore has an interest in convincing the USA (and its allies) to follow international law, according to the principle that a weak nation benefits more than a strong one when commonly agreed rules are followed by all. The strongest nation, currently the United States, is naturally always tempted to violate international law, simply because it can generally do so with impunity. This explains why the United States constantly feels constrained by the international law to which it is bound, and why it does not recognise the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

También en Blasfemias:

No essencial, Putin aproveitou uma janela de oportunidade escancarada pelo desastrado presidente americano para voltar a colocar a Rússia como actor decisivo na geopolítica mundial, com foco especial no Médio Oriente e no Islão, donde estava afastada desde, pelo menos, a invasão soviética do Afeganistão. E a mensagem foi muito clara: a pax americana terminou, e o mundo conta novamente com a Rússia para equilibrar o xadrez mundial. A carta “escrita” por Putin é, de resto, uma peça admirável de mestria e de cinismo político, porque utiliza os valores que são caros aos EUA para os chamar à ordem e envergonhar o presidente americano.

Putin sobre Siria en el New York Times

English: ХЬЮСТОН. Выступление в Университете Р...

English: ХЬЮСТОН. Выступление в Университете Райса. Русский: ХЬЮСТОН. Выступление в Университете Райса. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Una carta interesante, sobre todo por venir de quién viene y por el contraste que ello supone con la realidad política rusa de la que es directo responsable. Si realmente fuera tan humanista como la carta parece mostrar, determinadas decisiones nunca se hubieran tomado (por ejemplo, esa búsqueda de la condena del disidente, especialmente si puede tener poder: el último es Navalny):

“Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government.”

“It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it.”

“And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

Gracias a Blasfémias.net.

Simplemente señalar que, si el Consejo de Seguridad es más parecido a un baile de verbena que a un foro serio donde discutir crisis internacionales, es porque, en lugar de apoyar a las personas que realmente están esas crisis, los países se apoyan unos a otros por sus variados intereses internacionales.

En O Insurgente hay un párrafo que profundiza en la dirección que señalé arriba:

Em jeito de conclusão: o Presidente Putin descobriu, numa notável peça retórica, que a utilidade das leis e do bom-senso internacionais podem servir os seus interesses. Nada contra este processo natural mas já me custa endeusar a criatura. É que já me chegam um Nobel da Paz como Arafat ou um outro como Obama.

Por último, los generales americanos han aumentado a tres días los necesarios para la intervención militar en Siria.

Epidemia de violaciones en Siria

World Affairs escribe sobre las violaciones en tiempos de guerra y sobre los reportajes que señalan un crecimiento exponencial de este tipo de arma de guerra en Siria:

The World Health Organization estimates that as many as 535,000 women were victims of war rape during the Rwanda Genocide in 1994, and 67 percent of them contracted HIV as a result. That finding set off advocates who tried to bring biological-weapon bans into the debate since HIV is a virus—given that no other laws or treaties directly addressed the problem. That tactic did not accomplish much.

Estimates of war-rape victims during the Bosnia war of the 1990s range from 20,000 to 50,000. After that became known, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia declared that “systematic rape” in time of war is a “crime against humanity.”

Nonetheless, Margot Wallström, the UN’s special representative on sexual violence in conflict, said only 12 individuals from that war have ever been brought to trial—even though judges from the criminal tribunal ruled that Bosnian Serb armed forces used rape as an “instrument of terror.” They declared that a “hellish orgy of persecution” occurred in various Bosnian camps.

Now, reporting from Syria indicates that war rape is rampant there, too. For example, an Atlantic magazine reporter wrote earlier this year that Syrian government soldiers hauled a jailed rebel soldier’s fiancée, sisters, mother, and female neighbors to the prison and raped them, one by one—right in front of him. That, the report said, was not an uncommon occurrence.

“¿Alguien se preocupó de contar los aliados?”


img_1087_krauthammer-obama-postering-over-budget-cuts-is-a-farce (Photo credit: angel_kulikov)


CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: It is a complete humiliation for the Obama administration. Forget about the merits of what Obama wants to do which I think it’s a bad idea. But let’s assume it’s a good idea. This involves the elementary conduct of international diplomacy, trying to get some allies aboard so you don’t act unilaterally. So who’s the main ally in the world who’s been with us in every trench for the last 100 years? The British. And now the British have voted against us. The other supposed ally was the French, President Hollande, and now he’s saying we got to wait for the report from the UN inspectors which will be early next week.

So here is Obama and the Democrats who railed against the Bush administration for its supposedly unilateral invasion of Iraq where we had 48 allies for a mission that involved boots on the ground, a real invasion, a real war. And here’s Obama trying to gather an ally or two for a pinprick and he gets nothing. This is just on the basis of thinking ahead, let’s say, a week ahead. When they leaked all this information about exactly what we’re going to hit, where we’re going to hit it, what the reasons are and the objectives are, and we’re going to have a coalition of the willing, did nobody actually think to check on the allies? I mean, these are guys who couldn’t organize a three-car funeral.


El ataque al complejo de la ONU en Somalia ha sido “bárbaro”

At least 14 people died and 15 others were wounded in an attack on the U.N. headquarters in the Somali capital of Mogadishu on Wednesday.

Seven militants, four U.N. employees and three female civilians were killed, said Abdikarim Hussein Guled, the country’s interior and national security minister. The other victims were rushed to a hospital.

Al-Shabaab, the militant group linked to al Qaeda, claimed responsibility, the group said on Twitter.

No sólo pusieron una bomba fuera sino que algunos entraron dentro del complejo y se suicidaron dentro. Nada nuevo bajo el sol, salvo nuevas víctimas… 😦

Refugiados sirios implican a basij iraníes en la represión

Bashar and Asma al-Assad, President and first-...

Bashar al-Assad y su mujer. Image via Wikipedia

La violenta intervención del Ejército de Bachar al Asad en la ciudad de Yisr al Shugur ya ha provocado la huida hacia la vecina Turquía de más de 2.500 sirios, en medio de pruebas de que Irán no solo está detrás del aparato represor sirio, sino que milicianos basij están participando directamente en las operaciones de castigo. A ello se une la falta de acuerdo en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU para sacar adelante una resolución de condena, por la oposición de Rusia y China, con derecho a veto, y Brasil.

Los testimonios de varios heridos ingresados en el hospital de Antioquía implican a agentes iraníes en la dispersión a tiros de una protesta en la ciudad de Idlib, el 20 de mayo, según recoge el corresponsal de France Press en esta ciudad turca. «Había policías de civil, pero también soldados iraníes», relata desde su cama Mustafá, un joven vendedor de metales herido de bala en una pierna y en un brazo. «Yo los vi con mis propios ojos: les pedimos que no nos atacasen, pero no hablaban árabe». «Llevaban barba, y en el Ejército sirio está prohibida», añade el comerciante, evocando igualmente un uniforme negro desconocido en Siria. Akram, un estudiante de 17 años, también herido de bala, no tiene dudas: «Eran basij [milicianos voluntarios islámicos iraníes]».

Más aquí.

Related articles

Los talibanes causan más de las 3/4 partes de las víctimas en Afganistán

Taliban in Herat.

Image via Wikipedia

Según un informe de la ONU, al que se opuesto firmemente los talibanes:

Los insurgentes talibanes calificaron de “propaganda” las cifras publicadas el sábado por la ONU, según las cuales ellos son responsables del 82% de las víctimas civiles registradas en Afganistán en mayo.

Los talibanes pidieron además que las Naciones Unidas aporten las pruebas de sus afirmaciones.

“El comunicado de Naciones Unidas (…) parece propaganda contra el Emirato Islámico de Afganistán”, nombre del Estado afgano entre 1996 y 2001, afirmaron los talibanes en un comunicado.

Pero hay más:

Las muertes de niños aumentaron alrededor del 55 por ciento durante el primer semestre de este año por los talibanes, en comparación con el año pasado. Así, 3.268 personas murieron el 1 de enero de 2010, y 1.997 resultaron heridas y mutilado. 2.477 de estas personas murieron o resultaron heridos por las fuerzas anti-gubernamentales, como los talibanes, mientras que 386 se puede culpar a las fuerzas pro-gubernamentales, incluida la Fuerza Internacional de Asistencia y fuerzas de seguridad afganas.